W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > January 2003

Re: abstract syntax and RDFS

From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 21:56:37 -0500
Message-Id: <p05200f08ba55096c9a3b@[]>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, jjc@hpl.hp.com
Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org

At 20:16 -0500 1/22/03, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
>Subject: Re: abstract syntax and RDFS


>>  I think the following RDF and RDFS properties and classes are cool in
>>  annotations and Annotations:
>>     rdfs:comment
>>     rdfs:label
>>     rdfs:seeAlso
>>     rdfs:isDefinedBy
>I explicitly allowed rdfs:comment and rdfs:label, although I am somewhat
>unhappy with allowing rdfs:comment.  I think that rdfs:seeAlso and
>rdfs:isDefinedBy have no place in OWL Lite or OWL DL.

in D+O, people use isDefinedBy  primarily in their data documents 
(i.e. the ontology instance stuff)where it provides a useful function 
(there's not always a direct namespace link to the class definition 
in one step)  - why would you leave it out?  seeAlso seems irrelevant 
to Owl, but seems like there is no trouble having it in the 
annotations (i.e. no worse than someone adding their own creation) - 
any particular reason to leave these two out, other than general 
principles (i.e. do they actually break anything, as opposed to 
offending ones sensibilities?)


Professor James Hendler				  hendler@cs.umd.edu
Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies	  301-405-2696
Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab.	  301-405-6707 (Fax)
Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742	  240-731-3822 (Cell)
Received on Wednesday, 22 January 2003 21:56:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:56:50 UTC